Ian Cowie was named Consumer Affairs Journalist of the Year in the
London Press Club Awards 2012. He has been head of personal finance at
Telegraph Media Group since 2008, having been personal finance editor
since 1989. He joined the paper in 1986. He is @iancowie on Twitter.

Au revoir to the Aviva chief exec who fell victim to the shareholder spring

Mr Moss may be blameless – and Aviva is certainly a better-run business than many insurers, including offering valuable shareholder perks. But, before angry scenes at last week’s shareholder meeting, his remuneration package had shared none of the pain the owners of the business felt over the last decade or more.

While the Financial Services Authority (FSA) frequently intervenes in the interests of insurers’ customers, it has done nothing to protect the owners of these businesses – such as many small shareholders, saving for their own retirement. Few, it can safely be said, will have gathered sufficient funds to retire like Mr Moss.

By contrast, Mr Moss and his boardroom brethren have done very well. One angry investor claimed last week that, since Mr Moss became chief executive in 1997, the share price has fallen by 62pc while executive pay increased by 90pc. Similar divergence between shrinking shareholder returns and booming directors’ bonuses can be seen at many banks and other listed companies.

Where's the justice in that? As I pointed out in this space in January last year, this is an important question to ask both the FSA and MPs are missing the point as they go a banker bashing with multi-million pound corporate fines and sound bites about the size of bonuses.

A much better way to make the men who head up these high street institutions treat their customers fairly and share the pain shareholders feel would be to legislate to impose a new balancing item or risk to set alongside the potential reward of a director’s bonus. This could take the form of a "malus" or reduction in executive remuneration to be paid by members of the board.

Individual investors are often warned that accepting risk is the price of seeking high returns. Why shouldn’t the same equality of risk and reward apply to directors and other heads of financial institutions who manage our money?